alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{ I n Archive} Water Quality Standards Regulation Consultation mnellenbach, bstrobridge, tamra.spielvogel, Ephraim King to: wollack, berndt, jsheahan, brosenberg, 08/12/2010 10:36 AM jufner, aseth, jimo, mgriffin, kbrubach, s.rolland, CHornback, Jack Bowles, Eileen McGovern, Glynis Hill, Cc: Thomas Gardner, Christina Christensen, Fred Leutner, Chelsea

________**orris,** Evelyn Washington, Grace Robiou, Shari Barash, Fred History: This message has been forwarded. Archive: This message is being viewed in an archive. Dear Intergovernmental Association Colleague,
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is in the early stages ofdeveloping proposed revisions to the Water Quality Standards Regulations. By making these revisions, EPA intends to improve the effectiveness in restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters. The proposed revisions are expected to be published in the Federal Register in summer 2011.
EPA is seeking your consultation and input at a meeting to be held on September 2, 2010, from 10:00 a.m. to 11 :30 a.m. at the U.S. EPA East Building in Room 1117A. The EPA East Building is located at 1201 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC. Please refer to the e-mail attachment entitled, "Enclosure 1" for the Federal Register notice, meeting agenda, and briefing information. We have invited the Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators (ASIWPCA) and the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA) to participate as technical advisors during this meeting

. We are conducting this consultation consistent with the terms ofExecutive Order 13132 , entitled, "Federalism," which directs federal agencies to consult with elected state and local government · officials, or their representative national organizations, when developing regulations and policies that may impose substantial compliance costs on state and local governments. While EPA is still evaluating the economic impacts on state and local governments, we have chosen in this instance to solicit your input regardless ofpotential cost impacts. To that end, the purpose of this meeting is to provide you with general background on the proposed revisions, answer any questions you may have , and seek your formal written remarks pursuant to the Order.
EPA has created a web site at http: //www.epa.gov/waterscience /standards/rules/wgs/ to provide information and receive views on the proposed changes under consideration. While we would appreciate any input you can provide at the briefing, you will ha ve the opportunity to provide written comments up to 45 days after the meeting, by Monday , October 11 

### 'h.
Please let us know ifyou will be able to attend by contacting Evelyn Washington ( Washington.Evelyn@epa.gov) and Jack Bowles (Bowles.Jack@epa.gov). If you have questions or concerns regarding the proposed revisions or the consultation process, please contact Fred Leutner, Senior Advisor for Water Quality Standards at (202) 566

-0378

. Ephraim S. KingDirector Office of Science and Technology

### ~ _!!!!!. Enclosure 1

.pdf
-----Original Message-----

From: Carol [mailto:rednick@cfl.rr.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 1:27 PM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB32

What is wrong with you people are you in bed with Fund Managers and the like. It is a cold day on earth 

when one of are government agencies does something positive for the middle class. Now you want to 

give more advantage to big Wall Street. Your RIN 1210-AB32 is unwanted,unnecessary ,unneeded and 

you have no business in my business. What is your profit margin on this bill? Open disclosure is a 

right!People do not want this kind of governing. Don’t you get it! Carol Nicholson Retired and worked 

my whole life Thank you very much!
Exhibit 24.9



POWER OF ATTORNEY



KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that I, Ronald Rubin, do hereby appoint John W. Rowe and Randall E. Mehrberg, or either of them, attorney for me and in my name and
on my behalf to sign the annual Securities and Exchange Commission report on Form 10-K for 2003 of Exelon Corporation, together with any amendments thereto, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and generally to do and perform all
things necessary to be done in the premises as fully and effectually in all respects as I could do if personally present.



/s/    RONALD RUBINRonald Rubin




DATE: February 17, 2004
Exhibit 21

Registrant and Subsidiaries of the Registrant

                                                      Percent of Voting
                                        State of      Securities Owned 
                                      Incorporation       By the Registrant

Coachmen Industries, Inc. (Registrant)   Indiana             

The Lux Co., Inc.                        Indiana             100%
Michiana Easy Livin' Country, Inc.       Indiana             100%
All American Homes, Inc.                 Indiana             100%
Clarion Motors Corporation               Indiana             100%
Coachmen Foreign Sales Corporation  U.S. Virgin Islands      100%
Viking Recreational Vehicles, Inc.       Michigan            100%
Northwoods RV Country, Inc.              Michigan            100%
Georgie Boy Mfg., Inc.                   Indiana             100%
Coachmen Industries of Texas, Inc.         Texas             100%
Coachmen Industries of Oregon, Inc.       Oregon             100%
Coachmen Industries of California, Inc. California           100%
Freeway Easy Livin' Country, Inc.       California           100%
Gulf Coast Easy Livin' Country, Inc.      Florida            100%
VFP Composites, Inc.                      Florida            100%
Rover, Inc.                                 Ohio             100%
All American Homes of Iowa, Inc.            Iowa             100%
Southern Ambulance Builders, Inc.         Georgia            100%
Colfax Country RV, Inc.                North Carolina        100%
All American Homes of 
     North Carolina, Inc.              North Carolina        100%
All American Homes of Tennessee, Inc.     Tennessee          100%
All American Homes of Ohio, Inc.            Ohio             100%
From: C.D.Ferguson[mailto:cdfergu@qmail.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 2:01 PM 

To: Talk to DOL 

Subject: Pissing Contest 

To whom it may concern: 

l \V'1S sent an email from the Chamber of Commerce's head guy up there \vhom pretty much said the DOL vvas 

going to screw \Vith the Retirement of millions of people. Personnally I think there 1rns been to much screwing of 

everyone just about cvcry\vherc. A.s far as leadership 1 have been able at times to contact the DOL with what I 

think has been a foir decison or outcome. But this is far different than creating policies. You all seem to be trying 

to !ix some kind of money problem getting paid as a person up they at $80 per hour to fix our problems rather 

than screw us because someone dont like what someone said or the "wording" is vvrong. Really so this is a reason 

to drag it on waste time and money and to heck with those at the bottom because they will die off, and arc happy 

\vith the little amount they make. Heck of a plan. 

Why don't you be a little creative and do something like. i 

Rather than the people out here paying $600 per month on insurance hcnv about the US Gov. become 1he insmcr 

\Vith different plans or we \Vil! just leave it the \Vay it is. 

Build a Bridge from alaska to ussr to reduce cost of transport. if we can build a damn island in the sea i Em1 pretty 

sure 1,ve can build a bridge for a train. 

Or what about so tar panels on every semi to reduce the neecl for diesel fi.lel that has re fog units. 

But oh no rather than looking at contrncts \vho screw the US and the Ii ttlc people or doing a belter job in 

controlling \Vhat is on the internet or what is ''leaked" out. We vvould rather blame it on someone else and think of 

greed. 

l do not w;:int to get into a pissing contest between you or vvho ever simple because its about the money and your 

name or whos ever and truly not about the Little people. 

Every day 1 tum or the new::J it sickens me because of whos trying to screw someone else or someone got there 

feeling hurt over something that \Vas said or race \vhcn we as mankind can either move foward and take care each 

other or destory each other. You tell me were another person can man resides in the universe and I'll kiss your 

ass. 

I am tired of seeing what we have become babies in war dying and choppiBg heads off. The sick and the old. and 

the list goes on and on. We do not seem to understand compassion of our own today. Maybe this is because of the 

wonderful UN and a united globe world really then clean it the hell up and quit playing god based on your 

wealth. 

Have a Great Day 

Clifford Ferguson 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note®jPRO
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1351.html[7/23/2015 6:10:02 AM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 09, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvj-ier4

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1351

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Anonymous Anonymous

General Comment

Department of Labor

Please be advised that I am very capable of managing my finances, 401K and IRA, and do not require

 government input or intrusion in my retirement plans.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-04-00794-CR

Basilia Martinez Honeman, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW OF COMAL COUNTY

NO. 2001CR1955, HONORABLE BRENDA CHAPMAN, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

On August 17, 2004, Basilia Martinez Honeman was adjudged guilty of possessing

marihuana and sentenced to twenty days in jail. The deadline for perfecting appeal was September

16, 2004. Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1). On September 21, Honeman filed a document in the trial

clerk’s office that was treated as a notice of appeal and forwarded to this Court. Assuming this

document manifested a desire to appeal, because it was untimely filed we lack jurisdiction to dispose

of the purported appeal in anymanner other than by dismissing it for want of jurisdiction. See Slaton

v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522-23 (Tex.

Crim. App. 1996).
2

The appeal is dismissed.

__________________________________________

David Puryear, Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Patterson and Puryear

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: January 18, 2005

Do Not Publish
EXHIBIT 10.16


                     SCHEDULE OF INDEMNITY AGREEMENTS



          Employee                               Date of Agreement

          William E. Greehey                     February 24, 1987

          F. Joseph Becraft                      May 1, 1995

          Edward C. Benninger                    February 24, 1987

          Ronald K. Calgaard                     February 16, 1996

          Robert G. Dettmer                      October 17, 1991

          A. Ray Dudley                          July 21, 1988

          Ruben M. Escobedo                      October 1, 1994

          Don M. Heep                            February 22, 1990

          James L. Johnson                       April 25, 1991

          Lowell H. Lebermann                    February 24, 1987

          Stan L. McLelland                      February 24, 1987

          E. Baines Manning                      July 16, 1986

          Susan Kaufman Purcell                  October 1, 1994
§ 236.1045 Training specific to office control personnel. ( a ) Any person responsible for issuing or communicating mandatory directives in territory where PTC systems are or will be in use shall be trained in the following areas, as applicable: ( 1 ) Instructions concerning the interface between the computer-aided dispatching system and the train control system, with respect to the safe movement of trains and other on-track equipment;
( 2 ) Railroad operating rules applicable to the train control system, including provision for movement and protection of roadway workers, unequipped trains, trains with failed or cut-out train control onboard systems, and other on-track equipment; and
( 3 ) Instructions concerning control of trains and other on-track equipment in case the train control system fails, including periodic practical exercises or simulations, and operational testing under part 217 of this chapter to ensure the continued capability of the personnel to provide for safe operations under the alternative method of operation.
( b ) [Reserved]
Grafton,

Dec., 1899.

#### Bristol Creamery Co. *v.*Tilton. Same *v.*Dalton. Same *v.*Emmons.

Where subscriptions to corporate stock are in excess of the authorized issue and no allotment has been made, the subscribers are not liable for an assessment upon the shares.

Assumpsit, for an assessment upon corporate stock. Plea, the general issue. Facts found by the court. The corporation was formed under the general law, in May, 1893, with a, capital of $2,500, divided into 100 shares of the par value of $25 each. The associates took no steps to have the stock subscribed, but the defendants without authority obtained subscriptions for 107 shares. There was no formal ratification of the defendants’ acts, but on September 16, 1893, at a meeting of directors elected by the associates at the first meeting held in May, it was voted “ *\o*instruct the secretary to . . . assess the stockholders five dollars per share.” No allotment or apportionment of the stock was ever made so as to avoid the over-subscription.

*Dearborn*& Chase, for the plaintiffs.

*Lewis W. Fling*and *Leach &*Stevens, for the defendants.

Pike, J.

Even if the vote by which the secretary was Instructed to “ assess the stockholders five dollars per share ” was an implied ratification of the defendants’ acts, the subscribers for the 107 shares did not thereby become shareholders in the corporation. There was authority for the issuance of only 100 shares, and until these should be allotted or apportioned no contract of membership could exist upon which either the corporation or subscribers would be liable. *Melvin*v. Hoitt, 52 N. H. 61, 67. No allotment or apportionment having been made, the subscribers never became shareholders in the corporation or liable for any of the shares subscribed.

*Judgment for the defendants.*

Chase, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
PRT works with village to build school
 By Staff Sgt. Darnell T. Cannady , Ghazni PRT
  
 GHAZNI PROVINCE, Afghanistan (August 21, 2011) — Ghazni Provincial Reconstruction Team  members and civil engineers conducted a shura with the Andar District  subgovernor and village elders to ensure the completion of the Wali Lali  school project. PRT leadership asked for the shura because little progress was being  made on the school, due to a disagreement between the contractor and  village elders.  They conducted a small engagement with the village  elders to see how they felt about building the school and what it would  take to get the project back on track. “Right now it isn’t a good place to learn and not a lot of kids go to  school because there is no school.  When we have that school more kids  will go to school and the learning standards will get better,” said  Ahmdzig, a Wali Lali village school teacher. After the engagement, the village elders said they supported the project and were willing to work to get it restarted. “We have no problems with a school being built here,” said a village  elder. “This will be good for our village and good for the children.” With the children in mind, the team from Forward Operating Base Ghazni said they were happy with the outcome. “The only thing we didn’t have was the contractors there to actually  meet with the villagers but hopefully soon we will be able to get both  sides in contact with one another,” said Mr. Bill Anderson, engineering  technician with U. S. Army Corps of Engineering. “If everyone does as  they said they would, then the two sides should be getting together soon  and the project should resume.”
# July 25: Military airstrikes continue against ISIS terrorists in Syria and Iraq

/ Published July 25, 2017
July 25, 2017Release # 20170725-01FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE**SOUTHWEST ASIA -** On July 24, Coalition military forces conducted 27 strikes consisting of 29 engagements against ISIS terrorists in Syria and Iraq.In Syria, Coalition military forces conducted 25 strikes consisting of 27 engagements against ISIS targets.* Near Abu Kamal, one strike engaged an ISIS tactical unit and destroyed a vehicle.* Near Al Shadaddi, seven strikes engaged five ISIS tactical units and destroyed two staging areas, two command and control nodes, an IED storage area, an observation post and a fighting position.* Near Dayr Az Zawr, five strikes destroyed 14 ISIS oil stills and five well-heads.* Near Raqqah, 12 strikes engaged nine ISIS tactical units; destroyed seven fighting positions, a VBIED, and a mortar system; and damaged a fighting position.In Iraq, Coalition military forces conducted two strikes consisting of two engagements against ISIS targets.* Near Al Qaim, one strike suppressed an ISIS tactical unit.* Near Rawah, one strike engaged an ISIS tactical unit and destroyed a supply cache.Additionally, 13 strikes were conducted in Syria and Iraq on July 20 and July 23 that closed within the last 24 hours.* On July 20, near Raqqah, Syria, one strike engaged an ISIS tactical unit and destroyed a fighting position.* On July 23, near Raqqah, Syria, nine strikes engaged three ISIS tactical units; destroyed six fighting positions, a vehicle, and a tunnel entrance; and damaged a supply route.* On July 23, near Kisik, Iraq, three strikes engaged an ISIS tactical unit, destroyed a fighting position, and suppressed a mortar team.These strikes were conducted as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, the operation to destroy ISIS in Iraq and Syria.  The destruction of ISIS targets in Iraq and Syria also further limits the group's ability to project terror and conduct external operations throughout the region and the rest of the world.This Coalition strike release contains all strikes conducted by fighter, attack, bomber, rotary-wing, or remotely piloted aircraft, rocket propelled artillery and ground-based tactical artillery.A strike, as defined in the Coalition release, refers to one or more kinetic engagements that occur in roughly the same geographic location to produce a single, sometimes cumulative effect in that location.  For example, a single aircraft delivering a single weapon against a lone ISIS vehicle is one strike, but so is multiple aircraft delivering dozens of weapons against a group of ISIS-held buildings and weapon systems in a compound, having the cumulative effect of making that facility harder or impossible to use. Strike assessments are based on initial reports and may be refined.CJTF-OIR does not report the number or type of aircraft employed in a strike, the number of munitions dropped in each strike, or the number of individual munition impact points against a target. The information used to compile the daily strike releases is based on 'Z' or Greenwich Mean Time.
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of RegeneRx (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ending June 30, 2008 (the “Report”), I, J.J. Finkelstein,Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company as of and forthe periods presented in this report.

 

 
| Date:  | August 11, 2008    |   |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|--------|
|   | /s/J.J. Finkelstein     |
|   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
# Time Series Not Adjusted
#### Susan P. Dimmick, *Respondent, v.*John W. Redmond, Appellant.—

Judgment of County Court reversed and that of justice affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Boardman, J.;

Learned, P. J., dissenting on opinion of Maynard, Co. J.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 11325 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee

v. RUDY GARCIA,
Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 5:16 -CR- 11 -1

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Rudy Garcia has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Garcia has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Garcia’s claim of ineffective assistance

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED March 28, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-11325 Document: 00513928778 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/28/2017No. 16

- 11325

2 of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim without prejudice to
collateral review. See United States v. Isgar , 739 F.3d 829, 841 ( 5th Cir. 2014). We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Garcia ’ s response . We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review and dispense with further briefing. However, the district court’s written judgment fails to reflect the dismissal of counts two, three, and four of the
indictment . These counts were dismiss ed by the district court on the Government’s motion. Additionally, the written judgment incorrectly states that the offense of conviction involved “amphetamine” when in fact the offense involved “methamphetamine.” A remand to correct such clerical errors is

proper. See F ED

. R. C RIM

. P . 36. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, Garcia’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED, and the case is REMANDED to the district court with the instructions to correct the judgment to reflect the dismissal of counts two, three, and four of the indictment and to replace “amphetamine” with “methamphetamine.” Garcia’s motion for appointment of
counsel is DENIED. Case: 16-11325 Document: 00513928778 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/28/2017